Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
